Google and the Department of Justice

[thejenn]

Authored by: Jennifer Laycock

Full Text: http://www.searchengineguide.com/laycock/006603.html

A Snippet:

If you've not been living under a rock the past week or so, you've likely heard one or two (or a thousand) people comment on the battle that is raging between Google and the Department of Justice. While news and commentary on the situation has been flying around the media world at lightening speed, the majority of casual Internet users still seem to be having a difficult time grasping just what all the fuss is about.

[gbdoc]

I believe the only real issue here is whether, for what reason, and to what extent the government has the right, or even the responsibility, to curtail our privacy – “our” is all U.S. citizens, whether as individuals, companies, or whatever. This is a Constitutional issue, but reflects back to the guarantees for “certain unalienable rights [such as] life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” in the Declaration of Independence. This has developed into a major issue under and during the Bush administration.

It is the feeling of many, including myself, that the government is becoming increasingly intrusive into our lives, compromising our liberty to an increasingly unacceptable degree. Worse, this is being done by the executive branch alone, which is increasingly ignoring or evading the system of checks and balances provided by our judicial and legislative branches.

In my opinion, the DOJ’s case is neither sufficiently pressing nor sufficiently legal to justify its request of Google, and Google is wise to refuse on that ground alone, regardless their other reasons. Shame on MSN, AOL and Yahoo! for complying.

[paijondan]

what could be interesting would be to know the by-country rate of porn researchers. Not very hard to do, not necessarily more privacy-damaging that what already exists, and probably quite a morally unpleasant top five! Who bets for america first?

[daemonflower]

there's little harm on the privacy front in Google sharing the data

I strongly disagree.

The harm has, of course, already been done by AOL, Microsoft and Yahoo. The subpoena and the Search Companies' reaction is setting a precedent. If it all had been going through nicely for the DOJ, who knows what information they had been asking next?

In this case, as you quite correctly pointed out, the DOJ just wanted to avoid doing their own work. Instead of doing their own research, they probably thought, "Well, we're the big guys, we can get anything for free. Let's just subpoena the data from those companies who do this all the time. We don't even need a criminal case, 'cuz we're the DOJ, see?" (sorry, couldn't resist)

Excuse me please? What kind of world view stands behind that, coming from the DOJ of all places, from the institution whose purpose it is to enforce our rights? With this attitude, can you imagine what comes next?

I don't think they have any legal basis either, except perhaps the Patriot Act, but even they didn't have the gall to claim that pornography is threatening National Security.

So I think it's **** important that Google resists the subpoena. Not only for Google, who of course have their own interests to protect (which I think is quite legitimate), but it is important for everybody on the net.

[thejenn]

Now let's keep in mind again that this is not a privacy issue. Privacy issues have to relate to an individual's private information.

No private information woudl be released if Google gave up the goose. We're talking totally generic information here.

Yes, the DOJ asked for it, and yes, that was idiotic, but the current issue is not one of Google giving up personal information.

But, let's also consider the hypocricy going on here with Google. No, we won't give up data to the U.S., but we'll censor to kingdom come to get into the Chinese market and we'll give up whatever data they want.

Get on your high horses if you must, but don't act like Google's the angel here...

[St0n3y]

I don't agree with the argument that the gov't could simply just do their own research. Internet usage is far too reaching (and massive) for the gov't to hire a few people to pour through internet searches all day. This would not provide an adequate representative sampling in any way.

Jen, I disagree with this also:

Why the federal government think that the data from Google is suddenly going to confirm the existence of porn is beyond me.

They are not trying to confirm the existence of porn, but rather trying to confirm the accessibility of it (especially by minors). Big difference. Now, an argument can be made that the information they are asking for will not provide the data they are truly seeking, but that's another issue altogether.

Look, if laws can be enacted that prevent porn from popping up on my children's screen while doing a research report then great. A few years ago I was helping my daughter do a report on quicksand. Sure enough, a search pulled up a fair amount of porn sites (some kind of quicksand fetish). Since then I have never let my kids surf the internet without an adult in the room. Now, search has gotten considerably better since then but I'm still leery.

I'm all for personal freedom but we should also be able to not have to worry if our children will be accidentally--or even purposefully--downloading porn. Yes, parents have responsibilities, but it is also on the burden of society not to hasten the corruption of children when it can be helped without limiting anybody's personal freedom.

[Robert]

Originally Posted by gbdoc

I believe the only real issue here is whether, for what reason, and to what extent the government has the right, or even the responsibility, to curtail our privacy – “our” is all U.S. citizens, whether as individuals, companies, or whatever.

How is getting one million random web addresses and generic (meaning not tied to individuals doing the search) search data for a one week period curtailing "our" privacy?

It isn't.

Come on everyone, let's not wander into tinfoil-hat-conspiracy-theory-land here.

This is a Constitutional issue, but reflects back to the guarantees for “certain unalienable rights [such as] life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” in the Declaration of Independence.

This is not a Constitutional issue. You need to research what this is actually about instead of jumping to far fetched conclusions.

[Robert]

Originally Posted by St0n3y

Yes, parents have responsibilities, but it is also on the burden of society not to hasten the corruption of children when it can be helped without limiting antibody's personal freedom.

I'll also add that this is a great marketing ploy on Google's part. They are getting lots of press by pretending to stand up for freedom.

[bmccormick]

Looking at this issue from only the request made to Google, I would agree that there isn't any real privacy concerns here. However, this is a fishing expedition by the government and what is scary is if the requests for information don't stop with this one request.

Working at top 30 internet company, I was very surprised at the requests that would come in from the government requesting information. A subpoena would be filed against us about once a week that we would have to comply with. It was usually asking for any and all data we had on a specific user. They would want complete access logs, ips, email addresses, anything that we could come up with, privacy statements be ****ed.

The site was doing 50M pages / day and keeping those types of logs was not a simple thing to do. We weren't to tell anyone about the requests. I don't remember the reason exactly and am not a lawyer, but was told that just turning off logging wasn't going to be tolerated.

Now it isn't too far of a jump to worry that the government will take that list of searches from Google and come back with a subpoena requesting any and all info on anyone searching for "Blue prints of the NYSE" or "how to make thermite" once they find that there are people out there searching for it and can prove it. The president has already made it clear that if you're phone number is found in the wrong place, then that's all the probable cause necessary to bring the full spy power of the NSA down on you.

Want concerns people is that this is a ploy by the government to get their foot in the door and once they have this info, there is no way to take it back.